|
Safety Factor posted:How's this for a Ravenwing list? I'm thinking of using this as a baseline to build towards. Personally I would take a second darkshroud (both with assault cannons) over the nephilim. I think the Nephilim is a bit light on firepower for the points you are spending on it, though I can see the need for anti-flier. Also, if the Conversion Field on the librarian is the invul save I would drop it; most of your guys should be getting a 4+ cover save anyways. Use the extra points for a heavy flamer land speeder to block assaults on your bikes, which will give you a bit more board control.
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:09 |
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:I think house rules should be used to alter the game in ways to make it more enjoyable to your group of gamers, they should not be used as an excuse to be unclear about the rules. For example if the rules clearly stated that vehicles should not get Invul saves, it would be awesome to run a few games where house rules says they can! I know I'm late to the party but I just want to say that 40k isn't designed to be a game like Catan or TtR. it's not a board game. It's more akin, in its design brief anyway, to something like D&D which is all about rulefudging and compromise between players to help create a narrative. The issue is though that vocal portions of the player base want 40k to be a competitive and balanced game with comprehensive rules to be played in a tournament environment and the game kinda straddles both camps but, from the language used in the BRB a key element of the game is to come with a sense of fun and flexibility to create a cinematic narrative and to not be a douche.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 10:36
|
|
|
Lord Thrust posted:I know this isn't a music thread, but Bolt Thrower is playing in Baltimore and Austin this May. They pretty much only wrote songs about WH and WH40K and they're brutal and old. Hell, they released a 12 inch single in an issue of White Dwarf back when White Dwarf wasn't a Games Workshop catalog. I, for one, firmly believe they should be mandatory listening in all Games Workshop stores. Any co-fans out there in goon land? Bolt THrower is the best death metal band on the planet and I was seriously considering flying across the Pacific to see them play at the Maryland Death Fest. It would be refreshing to hear BT rather than Disturbed and Linkin Park on loving repeat at GW stores.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Man, Bolt Thrower. This takes me way back... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
On a turn that a psyker comes in, he can't cast blessings or maledictions, because he's not yet on the board, right? Can he at least bless his own unit?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
The main reason I could never stand entering GW stores was the goony pubescent music selection that was always playing. I wanted to hang out in the store checking out models and watching games but I had to leave after ten minutes usually because the music was just offensive. I basically don't like metal, but I loving hate metal-lite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
Some poo poo I'm working on: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
J Bjelke-Postersen posted:The main reason I could never stand entering GW stores was the goony pubescent music selection that was always playing. I wanted to hang out in the store checking out models and watching games but I had to leave after ten minutes usually because the music was just offensive. I basically don't like metal, but I loving hate metal-lite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Bolt THrower is the best death metal band on the planet and I was seriously considering flying across the Pacific to see them play at the Maryland Death Fest. I celebrate their entire catalog and got to see them live in 2011 at Summer Breeze in Germany. They only do three or four shows a year and usually they're in Europe. I'm really looking forward to the Chaos in Tejas show. If you're flying across the Pacific, Austin might be a closer option for you. My local GW store is as silent as the grave. It's kind of sad when they could be blasting some of the best death metal ever that just happens to be inspired by their products! I think Bolt Thrower played at one or two of the original Golden Demon awards way back in the late 80s. Powder Burns and To the Last would be a hell of a lot more inspiring than listening to some dudes having a pissing match over dry brushing versus highlighting. It's why I do my painting at home in my chamber of grimdark and metal! It's lonely but loud!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
Cataphract posted:I know I'm late to the party but I just want to say that 40k isn't designed to be a game like Catan or TtR. it's not a board game. It's more akin, in its design brief anyway, to something like D&D which is all about rulefudging and compromise between players to help create a narrative. The problem with treating it like D&D is there is no game master and you are playing against each other not on a team. When the goal of the game is to beat the other people you are playing with its important to our sense of fairness that everyone is playing by the same rules and that everyone knows what those rules are. Having a disagreement about the rules is not really being a "douche," most of the time my friends and I are not mad at each other or arguing, we just don't know what the actual rule is because it is not clearly stated in the rule book. Rolling a D6 to decide if your strategy is valid or not is not a fun solution for our group and 40k is much to complicated of a game to create house rules for all of its short comings. This being said I have played a lot of D&D 4.0 as both a player and DM. The rules are not confusing, there are a lot of them but most of them operate in similar ways. These rules have helped me and my gaming group have fun and "create a cinematic narrative." I am not arguing that 40k should be a game where it is unacceptable to "rulefudge" in order to help the game go places the designers didn't anticipate. I am merely pointing out that this is not an excuse to have poorly written rules and I don't understand why people use it as a defense. I don't understand how anyone could see value in confusing and unclear rules, if anything it makes it more difficult to expand and change the rules not easier. On a different note I think it might be really cool if 40k was played with a third party who constantly tried to make things interesting, fair, and enjoyable for all at the table. I know in D&D the best battles are those you just barely win, the ones where you had to use all your tricks and skills to pull off. These kind of battles are very hard to generate randomly and take some guidance from the DM. 40k could benefit from someone who has the ability to fudge dice rolls, introduce reinforcements, or dish out buffs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:The problem with treating it like D&D is there is no game master and you are playing against each other not on a team. When the goal of the game is to beat the other people you are playing with its important to our sense of fairness that everyone is playing by the same rules and that everyone knows what those rules are. GW would argue that beating the other player is not the goal of the game. The goal of the game is having a cool battle with lots of cool stuff happening. But that's not a good excuse for poorly written rules, and it's clear that GW is trying to improve the quality of its rules writing. You're correct to compare it to 4E D&D because 4E D&D's clarity and presentation are something all game rules should aspire towards. But you should note that a lot of the backlash against 4E has to do with the rules being too clear and too gamey (yes people complain about their game being too obviously a game). You should also note that Warhammer was originally written with the assumption that there would be a GM managing each game, and there have been many campaign rules published for Warhammer and its derivatives that are managed by a GM.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Man, the kinds of crazy poo poo you could do with this game if there were a GM!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
Fix posted:Man, the kinds of crazy poo poo you could do with this game if there were a GM! That's how my group rolls. Campaign weekends in a friend's garage, with a diminutive GM stitting in the rafters above us handing down proclamations and stealing the pringles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Thoughts/comments about this 2k DA:code:
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
I saw a girl walking around in my neighborhood in a Bolt Thrower shirt this summer; I'm pretty sure she's the one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
You need to find her, seduce her and make sweet, sweet love to her while being caressed by the brutal bass vibrations of Anti-Tank (Dead Armour). The child spawned from this union will, most likely, grow to be the Emperor of Mankind. Does anyone have a Bolt Thrower themed squad of Noise Marines? If not, why not? Lord Thrust fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jan 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
I just played a particularly daft game of 40k where my opponent managed to get First Blood on turn 1, Slay the Warlord on turn 2 (both achieved with a Vindicator) and reduced me to 9 cultists hiding in a building by the end of turn 5 but still lost because he'd moved his troops off his only objective to try and finish the cultists off. One flubbed charge in the final turn denying him both the chance to push me off the objective and get Linebreaker meant I sat 3VPs to 2 (his 2 for killing my warlord and getting first blood, my 3 for the objective) when the random game length roll ended the match. Truth be told I was fully expecting to be tabled by turn 3 - in small games a Vindicator just chews through armies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:GW would argue that beating the other player is not the goal of the game. The goal of the game is having a cool battle with lots of cool stuff happening. Then they have really done a poor job writing the rules. If they wanted to promote "cool stuff happening" then that should be made the objective of the game in the rules. Right now the objective is to score the most points through capturing points, killing enemy units, and reaching certain areas of the battle field. You get no points for "doing cool things" or "being fun to play against." I think these two things ought to be heavily rewarded and I have played games where the rules have done this. GW can't just say they want there game to be played like a certain way, they have to write the rules to enable and encourage the game to be played that way. Rapey Joe Stalin what kind of things does the GM in your games do? Does she just throw out random events?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
Is there a limit to the percentage of points dedicated to allies in your army, or is it just the force org chart that is the limiting factor? I would look it up myself, but I just borrowed my rulebook to my friend. The reason I'm asking is that I'm trying to get my IG models to ally with my main force of DA, but the IG actually be the de facto main force. So would someting like this be legal: code:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
TheBlobThing posted:Is there a limit to the percentage of points dedicated to allies in your army, or is it just the force org chart that is the limiting factor? I would look it up myself, but I just borrowed my rulebook to my friend. Yes
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
There's no percentages involved, you're just limited to the force organization chart. Your list is fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
Here are some small legal main force org armies: Orks at 115 points: Big Mek, two units of 10 grots with runtherd Greay Knights at 124 ponts: Coteaz and two units of 3 warrior acolytes Daemons at 139 points: a herald and two units of 3 nurglings Tyranids at 140 points: prime and two units of 3 ripper bases That'd probably be a dick move, to do something like "Yeah, I'm playing 2k of grey knights" and then slap down 124 points of Grey Knights and an allied IG parking lot or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Cool, thanks guys. At least I'm wasting a lot of points on tac. marines, so my list is far from the GK dick example. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
You can field a legal DE army for 110 points: one haemonculus and two 3 man wrack squads.JesusIsTehCool posted:Then they have really done a poor job writing the rules. Yeah, they're bad at writing rules and they're stuck in the stone age as far as table-top rules go. We're talking about a game that still uses tables to derive target numbers and has only recently started making use of key words.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Yeah, they're bad at writing rules and they're stuck in the stone age as far as table-top rules go. We're talking about a game that still uses tables to derive target numbers and has only recently started making use of key words. I don't want to sound super negative about GW. I really think their universe is interesting, the models are amazing (I don't really even have a issue with the price of them like most people), and despite the clunky rules the game is a lot of fun too. I just don't understand how you can go through 6th editions of a game and not have a clear set of rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Does anyone have a Battlescribe .cat file for Orks, preferably updated for 6th? Edit: Never mind, found it... Although if someone's made one for the IA8 stuff, that'd be awesome to see. Digital Jesus fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Jan 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:Tyranids at 140 points: prime and two units of 3 ripper bases Too bad Tyranids don't get allies 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Too bad Tyranids don't get allies All I want is the revival of Genestealer Cultists. Is that so much to ask? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:Then they have really done a poor job writing the rules. If they wanted to promote "cool stuff happening" then that should be made the objective of the game in the rules. Right now the objective is to score the most points through capturing points, killing enemy units, and reaching certain areas of the battle field. You get no points for "doing cool things" or "being fun to play against." I think these two things ought to be heavily rewarded and I have played games where the rules have done this. GW can't just say they want there game to be played like a certain way, they have to write the rules to enable and encourage the game to be played that way. Yeah, the thing about 40k and GW games is that they have point systems and detailed customization options within that that kinda lure in the wargamers who want to be able to customize their armies. Of course, the degree of customization available plays hell with the balance, but I don't think anybody would count 40k as a strong competitive ruleset, either. Still, even compared to say, Warmahordes, where all units of a type are the same, an IG platoon can have zillions of different layouts, for example. I don't think GW wants to slash the facade by cutting the points system out, though, it might be a step too far for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:I don't want to sound super negative about GW. I really think their universe is interesting, the models are amazing (I don't really even have a issue with the price of them like most people), and despite the clunky rules the game is a lot of fun too. I just don't understand how you can go through 6th editions of a game and not have a clear set of rules. Because each edition is an overhaul not an update. Each edition introduces new mechanics and rules and gameplay. It's not like a new edition of a board game which may include new art and error fixes. Each edition of 40k is a new game. Additionally A big problem is that the codexes trickle out slowly after the core release and the interaction between books from different editions can be a bit clunky. But I really think this is a storm in a tea cup. I've rarely come across a rules issue that wasn't solved by common sense. It's pretty clear that Terminators clearly have terminator armour and a vehicle can have an invul save. And I think GW has been pretty on the ball with errata recently too. Although, I have to say, printing the Dark Angels book with a huge number of errors in it is an absolute disgrace. The fact that the errata came out so quickly suggests they caught the errors before release but after printing and then thought "gently caress it we will release it anyway". They should have recalled, reprinted and copped the loss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
PierreTheMime posted:All I want is the revival of Genestealer Cultists. Is that so much to ask? Seriously, who doesn't? Fat genestealers and man-alien hybrids riding around in limos 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
Cataphract posted:Each edition of 40k is a new game. Not really. They've been using the same fundamental rules framework since day one. One of the problems with Warhammers (both of them) is that GW has never bothered overhauling the basic rules; they just tweak stuff around the edges. And even if each edition was a new game, that wouldn't be a good excuse for poorly written rules. D&D 4E was a completely new game, yet its rules were written with a clarity and precision that actually drove away The reason why GW's rules are unclear at times is that GW doesn't give a poo poo, most of their players don't give a poo poo, and all the money is in the models anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
2nd->3rd was a pretty major jump. Stuff like to-hit, to-wound charts were kept the same but few things apart from that. I'd say the progression from 3rd onwards has been a series of revisions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
You're right that 2-3 was a big jump, but those charts are the core mechanics of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
There are other mechanics that I would call "core" that changed. The charts do play a central role but I don't mind that they haven't changed since I can't think of any problems or inelegance that they cause. They're pretty simple mechanics that I think work quite well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
Yeah, sure, but those charts are the juicy center of the core. They are how the game answers the fundamental questions of a war game: "did I hit him?" and "did I kill him?" I don't mind that they haven't changed either. I have them memorized and I know the formulas behind them. But having to refer to a table for your core task resolution mechanics is inelegant and old-fashioned game design.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:
Mostly he adjudicates and prevents the more argumentative players from bickering for too long. But he also writes complete scenarios for us to play out, chivvies people into not taking dick lists*, and plots cool stuff like gargants that wake up. *Unless it's going to be funny**, like allowing a surprise Landraider in a 500 point list explicitly to fulfil the objective (destroying a space port control tower) by ramming his LR into it. **It wasn't that funny from my perspective on the receiving end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
PierreTheMime posted:All I want is the revival of Genestealer Cultists. Is that so much to ask? I don't really understand why they didn't just make guardsmen capable of allying with everyone. There's a fluffy way to make it fit every faction. poo poo, Digga boyz are straight up canon. 
Manifest fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Jan 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
So as a tau player from years back, my friend recently started a Dark Eldar army and wants me to play again so we can play around a little. I looked around online and the rumor mill says a new Tau Codex around May, is the rumor mill to be trusted? If it is I wanna wait until then to jump back in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:09 |
|
|
The REAL Gtab Fan posted:So as a tau player from years back, my friend recently started a Dark Eldar army and wants me to play again so we can play around a little. I looked around online and the rumor mill says a new Tau Codex around May, is the rumor mill to be trusted? If it is I wanna wait until then to jump back in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 06:06
|
|